Hitech Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the petitioner could not be said to have received a fair opportunity of hearing. The Court agreed with the petitioner's counsel that fixing a personal hearing during the lockdown period was inappropriate. The Court reasoned that the circumstances of the lockdown prevented the petitioner from attending the hearing, and the respondent authority should have considered alternative methods like virtual hearings or seeking clarifications. The Court did not delve into the merits of the petitioner's claim to avail the benefits of the Scheme. The impugned communication in Form SVLDRS-3 was quashed and set aside. The matter was remitted to the Designated Committee for a fresh hearing. The Court directed the respondent to fix a new date for personal hearing, intimate it in writing to the petitioner, and thereafter pass a fresh order. The Court also noted the dispute regarding the deposit amount and directed the department to verify the records and accept payment if any amount was due, despite the expiry of the time limit, given the pendency of litigation.

Facts

Hitech Projects Pvt. Ltd. (the petitioner) is a civil construction company that faced a show cause notice dated May 2, 2016, proposing recovery of Central Excise duty of Rs. 27,57,942/- for the period April 2011 to December 2015, along with interest, confiscation of goods, and penalties. An order in original dated April 13, 2017, confirmed the duty demand and imposed a redemption fine of Rs. 5,00,000/-. Appeals filed by the petitioner were dismissed by the first appellate authority, and further appeals before the appellate tribunal are pending. The petitioner sought to avail the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, by filing declarations. However, their application was deemed not maintainable due to the confiscation of goods and redemption fine. The petitioner was called for a personal hearing on May 7, 2020, but could not appear due to the nationwide lockdown. The Designated Authority issued an order in Form SVLDRS-3, rejecting the application.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner was afforded a fair opportunity of hearing before the Designated Authority, considering the nationwide lockdown on the scheduled date of personal hearing (May 7, 2020)? (Question of mixed law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019). Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that they could not appear for the personal hearing on May 7, 2020, due to the complete lockdown and closure of offices. They contended that the respondent authority should have offered an e-hearing or sought clarification, especially when courts and government offices were operating virtually. They alleged a "perverse attitude" by the authorities to frustrate their interest. They also asserted that they had made the requisite payment for the scheme. Revenue's Arguments: The revenue contended that the petitioner was given an opportunity for a personal hearing on May 7, 2020, and failed to appear. They stated that the SVLDRS-3 order was issued after complying with the scheme's provisions based on available records. They also questioned whether the petitioner had made the total deposit of Rs. 8,92,195/-.